tv Senate Debate CSPAN October 6, 2012 5:30pm-6:30pm EDT
ted cruz is the former solicitor general of texas. paul is a former member of the texas house. this is about an hour. >> good evening, everyone. thank you for joining us fothe debate. i'm your house for tonight. we have -- we are broadcasting live from the victory studios in dallas. we want to welcome viewers watching on stations all across the state. they are together the bidding for the first time before the november election. it is a race to decide who represents texans in the u.s. senate. we hope by tonight, you will have a better idea of who you want to vote for. we will follow your comments on twitter. on behalf to do is use the hashtag #belodebate. look for additional and
permission on twitter as well. we will hash tag supplemental and permission and each of the candidates. he will notice this is a very different debate. we are throwing out the rules. the candidates will face each other, answering the tough questions. moderating tonight's discussion our senior political reporter. joining him, gromer jefers. let's turn it over to them. >> good evening. thank you very much for being with us tonight. >> should be fun tonight. with someo start individual questions to each of you. we will start with mr. paul sadler first. you have an uphill battle. raising money has been hard. the democratic party establishment --[unintelligible]
democrats in texas are not strongly behind you. why should independent voters are moderate republican voters consider you? >> did not appease texas democratic party with the national democratic party. -- do not confuse the texas democratic party with the national democratic party. the national party made its decision on funding races a year ago. when this race was sewed up. i've would not read into much -- i would not read too much into that. i have a bipartisan record of accomplishment. accomplishing the largest profit tax cut in the history of the state at the time. that is a record done with a republican governor, is but the republicans and democrats in the house and senate. it was a bipartisan effort. we got things done for texas. >> can use them much money of
race? >> i really do not know. i have been on the road. >> 1 million, maybe. >> oh, no. i really do not know. texted democrat has not won a statewide office since 1994. do you consider this an uphill battle? >> it is always a battle. it should be in need to be. i understand that we have not elected a democrat in a long time. >> let's go on now to ted cruz. you said i'm going to run scared but you may few appearances and this september and agreed to this debate and one other televised debate. you turned down one in a houston last week. curtis that the governor for skipping almost -- you criticized the governor for skipping. >are you calling it say? >> our approach has been
consistent for nearly two years. crisscrossing the state of texas. we have been all over the state, in hundreds of ihops and denny's talking qith 100 voters at a time in every part of the state. that is what we're doing every day between now and election day. i am very glad to be here in this debate tonight. i am looking forward to another debate in a couple of weeks. it is important to present a clear choice to the voters. >> 1 pro-forma in republicans in the primary. 8-9 million texans will go up until november 6. why are you holding back? >> not at all. we are debating here today. i am on the road in a different city just about every single day between now and election day. >> why not another debate?
why not the one in houston? >> what i am focusing on is building support for our campaign. i am listening to the voters of texas. >> you have 38 media event in the republican primary. what is wrong with a six with the general election? >> it is not our obligation to help you in getting free media coverage. you convey your message to the texas voters. i'm convey my message. >> as he said to the tenant governor, the critical point to do. you have the opportunity now. even to the tea party debate which would not do. you face me now?
>> we are sitting here now. can launch every attack you want to right now on television to read this is a roundtable. >> i know you did not know enough about government. >> may be in it -- instead of saying i am scared to face you, i am facing you right now. forward and we will see if there are more debate later on. >> the issue of government assistance and who pays for them and receive them. the city recorded a video at mitt romney -- the secret recorded video of mitt romney at a private fund-raiser. let's take a look. >> 47% --
>> in 2010, 38.5% of texans filing a retirement paid no income tax. there is no complete data on who get government assistance but last year, 24% of households get social security. almost 14% debt retirement income. 5% get disability benefits and almost 14%, food stamps. >> do you think east texans are victims of believe government has a responsibility to care for them? >> of course not. i agree with mitt romney when he said is, there were poorly phrased? there is a difference. part of the philosophy of president obama and this administration is trying to get as many americans as possible dependent on government so the
democrats can stay in power in perpetuity. the reason i think that is failing is even those americans, if you break down that 47%, there is a significant chunk of people who paid into social security their entire life. that is very different from being dependent on welfare. that is a critical safety net our society has counted on that we need to insure remain strong for generations to come. even those who are receiving welfare right now, most americans do not want to stay dependent on government. they want to work for the american dream. they want to work to provide for themselves and their families. i think that is why the obama administration's objective is essentially using bread and circuses to make as many people as possible dependent on government, to keep voting democratic, is not succeeding. americans want to stand on their own feet. >> that is the craziest thing i ever heard of my life. you are accusing the president of united states of using a government program to manipulate people do not get a job, to be
dependent on the government for services? >> i'm impressed. we are a few minutes and -- >> let me finish. >> i am impressed. we are a few minutes in and you have now three times called me crazy on observing that the president has expanded government dependency. >> you are saying he is manipulating american so they will vote democratic. >> let's talk about the issue of benefits. in 1960, 20% -- of federal spending went to individual payments. this year, 65% of federal spending goes to individual payments. i would suggest we do have a problem with government --
>> we had a downturn in the economy. we have hard times, people looking for work and not able to find jobs. >> 65% of federal spending going to individual payments. it may not sound good, but we have created a welfare state. >> to blame it all on president obama is even worse. to declare the president of the united states is manipulating so people will stay and vote democrat? i think that is the most ridiculous thing i have ever heard. such a cynical view of the presidency and of government. that cannot possibly reflect -- >> your response? >> i think a far better approach than a dependency is removing the barrier the federal government puts in place to small businesses and allowing entrepreneurs and small businesses to drive. >> what barriers? >> i am very happy to discuss the various. >> i wish she would. >> let him finish and make his
point, then you can respond. >> what texans are looking for, and what is inherent in the east coast of texas, is that we are not looking for handouts. we're looking for the chance to the entrepreneur is, to work to achieve. i think there have been a host of regulatory policies under barack obama that has killed jobs, ranging from obamacare to dodd-frank, to the abuse and enforcement of environmental laws, the ban on the xl pipeline, the enforcement of labor laws -- those policies have killed thousands and thousands of jobs and collectively, we are making it incredibly difficult for small businesses to thrive, much less survive. >> so if you have 65% of spending going to individual payments, what would you do to try to reduce that? >> in order to create more jobs,
we have to control the national debt. i think that is what we have to do. i have said it from the beginning. i have given a plan to try to deal with it. this idea that somehow mr. cruz is lecturing us on standing on our own feet, i find incredible. he spent most of your adult life working for the government. you have not created jobs. you have not on your own business. i have. my wife and i own a retail store. we did not have the federal government with their boots on our neck. when george bush was president, we lost 700,000 jobs per month. all these programs were in place at the time. the only addition is the health care act, which has not been fully implemented. i think that you have a selective memory of where we are in this country and how we got to where we currently are.
>> i must say, mr. sadler may well be the only person, the only small business owner, former small-business owner in the state who does not think the regulatory and tax burden under this administration has made it harder to create jobs. i will tell you, crisscrossing the state, it does not matter, east texas, west texas, austin, dallas, houston, small-business owners say their life has become much harder with the regulatory uncertainty and burdens. two-thirds of all new jobs come from small-business. >> i am not hearing that from small business. you keep saying that, but i do not hear it. >> in response to the romney video, an obama video surfaced in which he discusses market forces and competition, but also the redistribution of wealth. let's take a look. >> it is figuring out how we structure government systems that pool resources and facilitate some redistribution, because i actually believe in redistribution, at least a certain level to make sure everybody has got a shot.
>> mr. sadler, do you agree with this notion of redistributing wealth from one side of americans to another site? >> i do not agree with that at all. i do not know the context, the full context of what he is saying, but that was 15 years ago. >> 14. >> 14 years ago. i do not follow that philosophy. i do not see any evidence, in spite of mr. cruz's claims, of him manipulating the public, as he suggests. >> mr. cruz, please respond -- do you believe he is saying he does not believe in redistribution? >> of course president obama believes in wealth distribution. one of the things mr. sadler has been clear is that he supports president obama.
this president has engaged in reckless fiscal policies. we have seen a national debt under president obama grow from $10 trillion to over $16 trillion. it is larger than our gross domestic product. we are galloping down the road to where greece and italy and much of europe find themselves. i cannot tell you how many texans have expressed to me one on one their concerns that we're jeopardize in the future up for our kids and grandkids if we do not get out of control federal spending under control. >> the numbers are wrong to begin with. we act redoubled our national debt under george w. bush. when you were working for him, i believe. the war in iraq and afghanistan and bush tax cuts -- we doubled our spending under george bush. we continue to add during the obama years, but had to deal with the iraq and afghanistan wars and the bush tax cuts that were never paid for. the support president obama as our commander in chief? do you believe he is a united
states citizen? do you accept the fact that he calls himself a christian? >> that was three questions. i will say, of course barack obama is our commander in chief. i wish he were a stronger commander in chief. >> to you believe in the? >> let him finish, please. you posed the question. >> i wish he were a stronger commander in chief. in recent weeks, we saw the tragedy of the assassination of -- >> let him finish. >> ok. >> they are simple questions. >> i understand you would like to put me on the cross examination stage. if you would like a -- >> i'll give you about 20 seconds, then we will move on.
>> i wish she were a stronger commander in chief. in the last few weeks, we saw our ambassador to libya assassinated in an organized action by al qaeda on september 11. his response was to affectively apologize and blame it on an obscure internet video instead of standing up to terrorists. >> are you going to answer my question, or just lecture? >> i do not agree with what you said and how you described it at all. >> he asked me a question back. >> we will move on to that in a moment. right now, i want to get back to
the original question -- a fiscal matter regarding taxes and the redistribution of wealth. >> mr. sadler, you have indicated support in letting the bush tax cuts at all income levels expire, a position which is beyond what the president supports. >> that is not what i said. what i said was, we will have to look at all of these tax cuts. in light of our national debt, we have to balance our budget, cut spending where we can, we will hope our economy continues to do well, but we will have to look at various sources to retire in national debt of $16 trillion. at the appropriate time, we have to look at every one of the bush tax cuts and figure out how they affect the economy, how to generate revenue we can dedicate to pin down national debt. that is what it will require there are obviously things we will not do. i do not think he will do the child care deduction or change the estate tax law, but i think there are levels of income and rates we have to look at.
>> the question was, do you support letting all the bush tax cuts expire? i want to play video from the houston pbs forum when you are asked, do you want to do away with bush tax cuts? >> the very thing we will have to do -- we will have to let the bush tax cuts go. in order to pay down the national debt. at the end of the day, if you look at the budget, a look at the budget you get down to military and defense spending or the bush tax cuts. >> are you talking about the bush tax cuts on all income levels? >> there is no qualification in that statement. what i said, and i still stand by, there are three things that doubled on national debt -- the bush tax cuts, -- >> the question is, do you want to expire them in total? there was no qualification. >> i am getting there. i think, and i still say, that we have to look at every single one of them and determine if we can use some of that money to
pay down our national debt. we can lie to the american people or tell the truth. the truth is that those tax cuts, if we let them expire, will increase our national debt by almost one-half. >> what is your position, mr. cruz? >> i would not allow the bush tax cuts to expire. i'm curious. i will commend mr. sadler. he is running a campaign with a great deal of courage because he is running an unapologetically liberal campaign and is running in support of raising taxes, a host of liberal views. i commend him for his candor in that. i do not think those are the values of most texans. i am curious, mr. sadler, which texans would you raise taxes on, and which texans would do not raise taxes on?
>> do you consider it liberal to say we have to balance the budget and pay down national debt. do you think is liberal to cut spending? i think is liberal to cut taxes when you are operating a deficit, because you are spending money. >> i do not think your labels mean a lot. what i have said from the beginning -- the centerpiece of our problems is the national debt. we simply have to look at this. whether we do it this year because of the way our economy is or next year, $2.3 trillion. >> i want you to respond to this. >> i'm glad there is a clear contrast between the two of us. i do not believe we should raise taxes. i do not think the problem is that americans are not taxed enough. mr. sadler has been very candid that he would consider raising taxes on every single tax and who pays income tax is.
>> that is not fair. >> if you would consider allowing all of the bush tax cuts to expire, that would raise taxes on every single tax and who pays income tax. are the texans to pay income taxes we would not raise taxes on? you did not have an answer. >> you will not put words in my mouth. i would say, the first place, we have to balance the budget, cut spending, and raise revenue to reduce the national debt. you have never given any plan to reduce the national debt. anything you even described. talk about the deficit, our current budget, but you never say how you will eliminate $16 billion of the national debt. even tom coburn, one of your heroes, from oklahoma, says we have to raise revenue. we have to cut spending. we have to balance our budget. that is not liberal, that is not conservative, it is just the truth. >> i will make a point that in that entire answer, mr. sadler did not disagree with me once that there is not a single texan who currently pays income tax that he is willing to rule out raising taxes on.
i've asked to three times that question, and you have yet to give an answer. >> hold on, what about the question of revenue? he mentioned coburn -- there was a proposal of three to one tax cuts to revenues. >> i think the problem we have right now is that federal spending is out of control. the problem is not the taxes are too low. historically, tax revenues have been roughly 18% of gdp. government expenditures have been roughly 20% of gdp. with barack obama as president, those have risen to nearly 25% of gdp. that is a structural shift in the size of a government. i think the solution is to bring it back. i think that is especially true when the economy is teetering on the brink of recession.
any economist worth his salt would tell you that the worst thing to do when the economy is coming out of recession and potentially going into another recession is to jack up taxes on job creators, small businesses, and yet that is precisely what my opponent is proposing? >> that is absolutely not true. we have to look at them at some point of time. you do not do this in a vacuum and not just do it in the last days of a political campaign. it is interesting to me -- if you acknowledge all of governments and just look at the $2.30 trillion -- it would still take eight years to pay down our national debt. yet you not commit to a single program to pay down national debt. you keep saying the same stuff that we have to cut spending. if you cut everything, abolish every government department, it would take us eight years to pay down. >> we will move on to foreign policy issues. >> with respect, the premise of your statement is not accurate. i have campaigned for two years on very specific strategies to reduce the spending in
government. we have to get the spending under control. your statement is not accurate. >> let me go back to the policy questions, foreign policy question about the situation recently with the north africa. american taxpayers pay billions of dollars -- it was a big issue when we saw the scenes will see in a moment in egypt and the anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. a radical islamist group attacked the u.s. embassy and tore down the american flag. in the same day, in libya, an assault on the consulate resulted in the death of the american ambassador christopher stevens and three others. these images echo the worst -- the recall those moments in 1979 with the taking of american hostages at the embassy in iran. u.s. taxpayers gave an enormous $1.6 billion to egypt, which is now run by a former member of the muslim brotherhood.
should the u.s. give up foreign aid to these nations, mr. sadler? >> no. not now, we have a fledgling government being formed a. with egypt withholding funds, the editorial board agreed is time for us to stop the old on that aid. it is in our best interests to stay involved. if we do not stay involved, russia, china, and other countries with in this world will i do not think to cut off the aid. >> mr. cruz? >> this is another area of clear disagreement. we should not be funding those who are contrary to our interest.
the only justification for continuing that aid or any portion of it is it to protect national security interests of the united states. we should use that aid as extensive leverage to protect national security interest. we should not be writing a blank check. look at the nation of egypt, the muslim brotherhood in power, i think that is an extraordinarily dangerous situation for us to be sending over $1 billion to them, much of it in military aid. it is a precarious situation. >> mr. sadler? do you agree with that? >> if he severed ties with egypt, you guarantee that people who are our enemies will be involved. i think it is a dangerous strategy mr. cruz is suggesting, and it violates every foreign policy we have had in recent memory. the fact is, the way we will help these countries go forward -- if we do not, our enemies will. i would much rather us be
involved. >> there is one principle clear from time immemorial -- tyrants cannot respect weakness. the tragic hostage situation in iran -- this president has engaged in the wrong pattern of coddling those hostile to the united states. recently, the president was too busy to meet with prime minister of israel benjamin netanyahu but could still appear on letterman. that that could take priority over meeting a valuable ally. >> do you still consider egypt and ally? >> i hope so. but i do not think we should write a blank check. i think we should be using the aid as a lever point to ensure they are an ally.
>> that is exactly what our foreign policy is. that is what our representatives and president have been doing. i do not know what world you are living in, but this foreign- policy has been in place for many presidents. we that support these countries and remain friendly with them, or you guarantee they go to the other side. i think it is extraordinarily reckless and dangerous -- not what you are suggesting, a position of weakness. >> let me ask you a question about a strong president. do you agree with president obama in his refusal to meet with prime minister netanyahu and his decision to go on "the view" instead. >> i think he should always meet with heads of government. i feel the government of the state of texas should meet with the president, regardless of their affiliation. that is a sign of respect. >> on that we have agreement. both of us think it was wrong for president obama to snub the prime minister of israel.
>> i do not know what his schedule is. you characterized -- rhetoric about snubbing, been weak, i do not know what the situation was for the president's office, his schedule, what the israeli prime minister's schedule was. if it is possible, you should always meet with foreign heads of government you so what scheduling conference the think would be sufficient? he declined requests from the prime minister to meet when the prime minister was in new york. my understanding is that during that same week he went on david letterman and "the view." >> at the same time? you are using that as an excuse? >> we do not even know. you do not even know. you slander our president and do not even know his schedule. >> i am describing his conduct. >> i do not know david
letterman's personal schedule or the president's, but we have come to the bottom of a half- hour. much more in the next 30 minutes. >> thank you. a spirited, sometimes fiery debate between our two than senate candidates. we appreciate them being here and appreciate hearing from you. you have been following on through the first half. use the hashtag #belodebate. what so far about the answers? what issues matter to you? have they answered your questions? let's talk about what you have to say, when we come back. more cruz versus sadler, right after this. >> the senate debate will continue in a couple of minutes. >> welcome back to, everyone, to ted cruz versus sadler. a lot of twittering going on, as the covered wide range of topics. let's get to some of them right here on the board. from david holmes -- i like this format. why won't you agree to more debates, cruz?
up next, coming from joshua, sadler is already looking desperate, he may want to rethink his insistence on six debates. from houston news, remove the moderators and that these two go at it. it may be too late for that. moderators are firmly in place during their best as they hash out issues. let's go to health care and immigration. back to you. >> we are going to talk about health care right now, a huge topic in texas and around the nation. mr. cruz, we'll start with you. you have made your position on the affordable care act commonly known by -- as obamacare. >> the first bill i intend to introduce is a bill to repeal every syllable of every word of obamacare. i intend to lead the fight to get that done. there is enormous pressure to compromise -- we should repeal it in its entirety. >> under the health care so far -- 357,000 texans under 26 have coverage by joining their
parents' insurance plans. 2.2 million seniors received free preventive care last year. texans on medicare have saved $223 million on drug prescription drugs. do you support taking away all these benefits that are very popular with texans? he went to take them away by trying to repeal this law? >> i believe we should repeal this law for two reasons. number one, it is designed to move us inexorably towards single-payer government- provided health care. if you look every nation on earth where socialized medicine is implemented, the result has been poor quality, waiting times, and rationing, putting government bureaucrats between patients and their doctors. the second reason it should be repealed as that i think obamacare was rammed through in
a brazen display of arrogance. it was clear it was contrary to the strong views of the majority of people. it is the only major piece of social legislation of modern times to be passed on a strictly partisan vote, only by democrats, despite the fact that brokers in virginia had elected a republican. in massachusetts, the scott brown race was effectively a referendum on obamacare. and yet this president and nancy pelosi and harry reid rammed it through. >> the question -- if you were elected, do you want these benefits that hundreds of thousands of texans now have -- do you want them taken away? >> that is not exactly right. i support as a dividend health care reform. >> the lot of the land is in the books. do you want to have it taken away?
>> you cannot talk about half without the other half. the other half -- i think health care reform should follow if you principals. number one, it should expand competition in the marketplace. number two, it should empower patients and disempower government bureaucrats. let me give you three specific reforms -- number one, allow people to purchase health insurance across state lines. that would create a true 50- state national marketplace for health insurance. for example, talking about children under 26 being on the apparent policy. if we get a true national marketplace for of insurance, those parents who wanted to purchase that coverage to purchase set. we would not need the government mandating @. >> if i understand this correctly, you want to repeal obamacare. these benefits would go away. do you believe that or not? >> this is a clear indication -- honestly, the idea that you
would repeal the affordable care act today is absolutely the worst legislative strategy you can possibly imply to do the very things to say you want to do. you do not give away your leverage. right now, with the affordable care act, we have the greatest patient benefits we have seen in 75 years. they are law. we do not have to agree about them. we do not have to give anyone leverage to do that. we do not have to deal with insurance lobbyists. we are ready won. you give away closing the prescription donut hole. you'll give away pre-existing conditions. you give away, and children under age 26. you give away the fact that they cannot deny coverage simply because we get sick. you give away the right of women not to be treated as second-class citizens, as if they have a pre-existing condition.
you would give away their right to contraceptives. you'll get all these benefits away so that you can make a political point against the president. that is not good for texas and is not good for the united states. it shows a real fundamental lack of understanding. obamacare -- your complaints about obamacare, you have this conspiracy theory about the president, and you did not like the process. the end result is good things for people, living, breathing people and children. do not give away our benefits so you can make a political point. >> there were a host of accusations and mr. sadler said. most of them were not true. let me make a simple point. a few minutes ago, mr. sadler talked about his passionate on reducing spending and reducing the debt. apparently that does not come to the over $1 trillion of
expenditures obamacare represents. mr. sadler talks about giving things away -- one of the simplest things -- principles of economics is that there is no such thing as a free lunch. everything mr. sadler said he wants to give you, everything the government is giving us, it must first take from us. that is part of why the burdens on small businesses are so great. there are so many small businesses, even now, beginning to eliminate health care coverage because of these costs. >> let me ask you one question. if obama is reelected, president obama, and democrats hold on to the senate, there is no way you can repeal every syllable obamacare. what then? >> it will be very difficult if that happens. that is why it is important that we defeat barack obama in november and that we retire harry reid in november.
one of the biggest differences between my opponent and me would be the very first vote mr. sadler would cast if he were elected, which would be to vote for harry reid to be majority leader. harry reid has been the most irresponsible majority leader we have ever seen. the last three years, under his leadership, the senate has not passed a budget. >> i have to respond to this. i do not know who i would vote for majority leader, but we know who you not vote for, john cornyn. if the republicans gain control of the senate -- you have said twice, on two occasions, you would not guarantee you would support john cornyn. that is because your money comes from jim demint. if you are interested texas, how could do not support our senior senator majority leader in the abandoned the majority party if the republican party? you will not commit to him. >> mr. cruz? >> if mr. sadler suggests that
as a criterion voters should use, who will stand more closely with john cornyn, that is not a complicated question. john is enthusiastically supporting me with in this campaign. he is campaigning on the road with me. >> the question is whether you would support him. >> we will try one more time. >> would you vote for john cornyn as majority leader of the senate? >> he is not running for majority leader. >> would you vote for him? >> i know you are believing you are cross-examining a witness >> just answer my question. yes or no. >> i know you are leaving -- yes or no. >> let me know when you are done. >> give me a response, what ever it is, and then will move monday to answer my question. why what you answer?
>> because you keep interrupting. would you like an answer? >> tell me. >> he will give you a response. >> john cornyn is a very good man and i look forward to working very closely to represent the state of texas and conservative principles. mr. sadler -- you want to ask who john cornyn is supporting. he has been campaigning -- >> you will not answer the question. >> i look forward to working with him side-by-side. let me ask you, are you suggesting that you would not vote for a democrat as majority leader? >> i am telling you this. if i was a republican, i would vote for john cornyn. but all your money comes from jim demint and the super pac.
that is his biggest competition. we all know that. you will not answer the question. >> jim demint has made it clear he is not running for leadership. what i said, i said i think it would be presumptuous for me to commit to a leadership vote until the election. you showed no hesitancy -- >> we are going to go on. they will sort out their leaders in the next session. we are tentatively going to move on to immigration. mr. sadler, stopping illegal immigration, there have been proposals like tripling the size of border patrol or building expensive fences or walls. however, there are 11.5 million illegal residents in our country today.
1.6 million in texas alone. do you support a path to citizenship for people here illegally enter yes i do. our border, a lot of texans may not know, el paso is the safest city its size in america. our border is a great economic engine, a great cultural factor, and we cannot stick our head in the sand any longer. we need to secure our borders. we should do that. that is our right. we have the military to do that, right there in el paso with equipment available to do so. by that, we have surveillance techniques capable that we can utilize. the federal government should be doing it. but we have to -- we should have already passed the dream act for these children in this state who through no fault of
their own are here. they have no country. all they want is the american dream. ted likes to talk about liberty, but he only wants liberty for people he agrees with. liberty for these kids means becoming a citizen. why we turned them down over and over is beyond me. we should pass the greenback. finally, we should have a worker program to identify people here. they should pay taxes. then we should have some kind of clear pathway. it does not mean the front of the line. we can make whatever requirements we want. but we cannot continue to stick our head in the sand. this is too important, too important for our state. if we do not do anything, we will have the same discussion. >> mr. cruz, do you support a path to citizenship for the 1.6 million illegal immigrants in texas? >> i do not. i commend mr. sadler for running as an unapologetic liberal.
he supports amnesty for these illegals. i do not. he supports obamacare. i do not. mr. sadler has opposed second amendment rights. i fight for second amendment rights. >> what does that have to do with? >> mr. sadler has championed on income tax and the state of texas. i oppose that. there is a sharp difference. it gives texans a clear choice between what is right -- the right direction. >> so what would you do for the illegal immigrants here? do you see that as a problem? >> the texas home-building and restaurant industries are sensitive to that. >> immigration should have a staged approach. we have to get serious about security and stopping illegal immigration. i do not think either party has been serious about immigration. both parties have demagogued on it, but they have used it to
rally their base rather than rolling up their sleeves in solving the problem. we need to remain a nation that does not as welcome, but celebrates our immigrants. over 50 years ago, my father came as an immigrant when he was 18, not speaking english, working as a dishwasher. >> i want to know, again, what would you do it for the illegal immigrants already here? mitt romney says self-deport during the primary. do you agree with that? >> i think the first thing we need to do is secure the borders, fix the problem. but i said it is a staged approach. this second step related to that is put in place a strong verifying system so employers will face sanctions for hiring
people illegally. if we secure the borders, that is how we solve that problem. >> you tell so many lies, it is unbelievable. you have accusations against me that are unbelievable. do you hunt? when i say about the second amendment stuff -- >> is it true or false you voted against our concealed carry? >> i support the second amendment? >> true or false. >> i can engage in the same process you did. did you vote against our concealed carry act? >> i do not want my grandmother who carries a pistol to be a felon. >> that is a sharp difference. i got the freedom fund award for supporting the second amendment.
>> he wants to talk all night, but the fact of the matter is that i am a big second amendment supporter. i have four boys who hunt. i hunt. i have defended the second amendment. you did not answer my question if you even hunt. >> we are trying to get a response to the question of illegal immigrants. >> he went into a lecture about his father -- >> you made your point. >> the second amendment, all kinds of stuff. it is not my point -- it is in response to what he said. >> let him finish. >> do you disagree? >> i have stated my position on immigration and on the border. you have the worst policy for the border of anyone running for the united states senate. we have a culturally diverse
state. we have to resolve these issues so we can move forward as a state. you are sticking your head in the sand, about amnesty and things like that -- that does not help the situation. that does not help our border region. we have over $1 billion of legitimate commerce traded across the border every single day. yet you are scaring the daylights out of our border communities because of your policy. you even disagree with your wife, who served on a committee of the north american union of mexico, the united states, and canada. >> i am sorry, mr. sadler, that you feel obliged to attack my wife. >> i am not attacking her. you disagree with her. >> i think that is unfortunate you are willing to go there. >> i am not attacking her. it is a document that she worked on with condoleezza rice. >> you are talking over each other.
silence, please. i will let you respond, then we will begin to wrap up. begin. >> my broader point -- there is a sharp difference between mr. sadler and me. his policies, whether supporting gay marriage, supporting an income tax in the state of texas, and mr. sadler used to routinely introduce himself as being the guy who supports income-tax. >> you said i introduced myself around the state as a person who supports income tax. that is an absolute lie. >> no, it is not. >> yes it is. >> i never supported an income tax. i had the responsibility of looking at the tax system of texas, something you would not know anything about because you have never served in a legislature. this was to pay for our children's education. i had to look at every single
tax available, a sales-tax and income-tax, you name it. that is something the lieutenant governor of the time said was our responsibility. you would not know anything about it. what you do not do is do your job as a legislator, worried problems will come along later, to try to run a campaign. >> i do not blame you. there is nothing else to suggest that. i am sorry, mr. sadler, i think you lied. i am sorry you want to attack me personally. i do not intend to reciprocate. there's a sharp policy different between the policies you have advocated and are advocating. i also think -- >> if you will stop him in a
reasonable time -- >> we only have two minutes left ear. we will try to wrap up. mr. cruz, if you are successful, you will be the junior senator for texas. as i have said before, there is a chance that by then obama will be reelected any chance the democrats will maintain control of the senate. given the fact that you said earlier that you do not like to compromise, how can you be effective in that landscape? >> the premise of your question is not exactly right. i never said i do not like to compromise. i said my philosophy is the same as reagan's -- if they offer you half a loaf, you take it. i am happy to compromise with everyone. i would compromise if they are solving the problem. if they are shrinking spending
and shrinking the debt. if god forbid barack obama is reelected and harry reid remains majority leader, i will fight every day to defend texas and free-market principles. i think there's a very real possibility that the obama administration will go directly after fracking, which is opening enormous oil and gas resources. >> mr. sadler, you will join a most republican delegation from texas. how can you be effective or most of the members disagree with your policies? >> i do not in most of them would disagree with my policies. i've the history of bipartisanship. it is a record of honor and distinction. i was named by your newspaper one of six best legislators. every single law was passed in a bipartisan manner, with a republican governor, republican senate, democratic house. that is the value of my record. when you are looking at these
two candidates, this is a person who has never been elected to anything. i have a record you can look at. bipartisan record that you can look at. >> this election is a clear choice between the obama democrats, more spending, more control, and going back to our founding freedoms. >> we need to get out of here. thank you as always. >> thank you and thank you to both candidates. we want to leave you with a final note -- early voting begins oct. 22. the election is november 6. that does it for the belo debate from victory park in dallas. have a good night, everybody. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> the candidates for the open
seat in the connecticut senate meet for their first debate. we have the former ceo of world wrestling entertainment. we also have the representative of connecticut's fifth congressional district. it will be alive tomorrow at 11:00 a.m. -- 11:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> governor, you said in july that someone would have to explain what the vice president does every day. you said you would not be vice president under any circumstances. maybe this is what was going on at the time. tell me, coming forward, what is the vice president worth? >> my comments were a lame attempt at a joke. we all know what a vice president does. >> what do they do? >> we know what a vice president
does. that is not only preside over the senate, and i will take that position seriously, but i am thankful that the constitution well about a bit more authority to the vice president. making sure we are supportive of the president of's policies and making sure that the president understands our policies. energy independence in america and to be form of government over all and working with families and children with special needs. in a those arenas, john mccain has taught me -- tapped me and cannot wait to work with me. >> i do not know any early education program he is supporting. we did not funded, but we can
get back to that. with regards to the role of a vice president, i am sure the governor, with her principlend in my case with barack, barack -- i have a history of getting things done in the senate. john mccain with a knowledge that. i would be the point person with a legislative initiative in the united states congress. when asked if i wanted a portfolio, my response was no, but barack indicated that he wanted me to help him govern. give him my best advice -- he is president, not me. one of the things he said early on was he would pick somebody with a independent judgment and that would not be afraid to disagree with him. i look forward to working with barack and playing a
constructive role in this presidency, bringing about the change it needs. >> we will have more from this date -- debate tonight. tonight, out watch the debate between cheney and edwards. the also have the debate between joe biden and pailin and the debates from 1984 and 1988. that is tonight on a c-span. we want to hear from you. at on our facebook page, what is your favorite vice-presidential debate moment? go to facebook.com/cspan to weigh in. >> we are pleased to welcome to -- ajit pai. thanks for being with us here on "the communicator's."
you spoke to carnegie mellon get -- carnegie mellon. the wavy fcc does business. i want you to get your thoughts on that and reflect on your first few months. >> thank you for having made. one -- one of the things i tried to identify what ways the fcc could establish a regulatory framework in the communications technology sector. be a leader in that job creation and economic growth. it is one of the more dynamic parts of the economy. if you look at the statistics, job growth and economic growth has slowed in that department. identified three areas where the fcc could do more with respect to the it sector. to the it sector.